the difference being that NR puts the light EVERYWHERE and philips puts it on just a small patch of ground.

however for commuting, when combined with a helmet light, maybe this is just the ticket ?

the SafeRide will not get in anybody's eyes and if you need some motorist to see you - you aim the helmet light at him.

what do you think ?

i didn't want to return NR 3600 because after restocking fee and buying a replacement light i thought there wouldn't be any $ left defeating the purpose - but Philips is only $175 - so by switching from NR 3600 to it some $ can be recovered.

the biggest downside to SafeRide seems to be battery life. powered by 4 AA rechargeables users report about 1 hour battery life on high. this is pretty bad. but it also has a low with a usable run time.

I'd swear I read somewhere that Philips are coming out with a v2 that addresses some of the problems. Unfortunately, I can't find it again (that presumes it was a real experience rather than something I dreamed).

Being strictly an urban-streets utility cyclist, from the beamshots I've seen here and at Peter White's, I'm sold. It's definitely the best light I've seen for urban use.

If I must, I reckon I'll get out my jeweler's saws and drillbits and mod the light to get past its short battery life, complicated battery access, and cheesy switch.

I'd swear I read somewhere that Philips are coming out with a v2 that addresses some of the problems. Unfortunately, I can't find it again (that presumes it was a real experience rather than something I dreamed).

Being strictly an urban-streets utility cyclist, from the beamshots I've seen here and at Peter White's, I'm sold. It's definitely the best light I've seen for urban use.

If I must, I reckon I'll get out my jeweler's saws and drillbits and mod the light to get past its short battery life, complicated battery access, and cheesy switch.

what do you like about it ? are you currently having issues where your light is blinding traffic ?

what do you like about it ? are you currently having issues where your light is blinding traffic ?

I currently stay off the road at night because I don't have lights -- the old ones never really worked to my satisfaction, and with the new LED ones just looking at the beam shots for all the units til now told me that they would cause problems. I was going to roll my own, but my time is so overcommitted already that I finally had to face reality. So I was going to buy the least-awful one that didn't cost a fortune, but happened to see the PSR and ta-daaa. If bad comes to worse, I'll carry extra batteries with and just swap them. And cycling only for utility these days means most of my trips are under 2 hours road time anyway.

I just bought a Light and Motion Taz 1200 for my daughter who I caught riding around the university the other night without a light. Very impressive - great beam shaping. Needed to be an all in one. If it were a separate battery and light, she'd never use it. This is really quick to take on and off the bike and is really bright with a nice wide beam from the front wheel forward.

I just bought a Light and Motion Taz 1200 for my daughter who I caught riding around the university the other night without a light. Very impressive - great beam shaping. Needed to be an all in one. If it were a separate battery and light, she'd never use it. This is really quick to take on and off the bike and is really bright with a nice wide beam from the front wheel forward.

J.

nice beam but doesn't really seem to have any beam cut off up on top.

L&M seems to be the best at getting most efficient use out of Lumens but they don't seem to be concerned about blinding others the way Philips and B&M are.

The TAZ lights have three less in a triangular pattern with two leds on the top. The bottom led has a diffuser over it to light the near field area. The two top ones seem to have an optic and a reflector that spread the beam.

I think the phillips light is trying to comply with some goofy EU standard which, IMO, is unnecessary.

The TAZ lights have three less in a triangular pattern with two leds on the top. The bottom led has a diffuser over it to light the near field area. The two top ones seem to have an optic and a reflector that spread the beam.

I think the phillips light is trying to comply with some goofy EU standard which, IMO, is unnecessary.

J.

philips and B&M indeed are trying to comply with "goofy" regulations, but for road use i think that is very appropriate. i wish something could combine the output of a proper off-road bike light with those "goofy" german beam patterns.

philips and B&M indeed are trying to comply with "goofy" regulations, but for road use i think that is very appropriate. i wish something could combine the output of a proper off-road bike light with those "goofy" german beam patterns.

Yes, an 800 lumen light with a cutoff to minimize blindness in other road/MUP users would be nirvana. I am building up a Philips dynamo today that I am hoping works pretty well for fast morning riding.

Truly an EXCELLENT light for utility cycling/commuting

I'd to make a quick run to the hardware the other night when my light was already tired from being used as a flashlight through the day. It conked out on the way back, but having the thumbscrew in place of that M3 socket-head (see my post on usability elsewhere) made all the difference. I swapped out the tired batteries and was on my way again in 2 minutes.

Although the light is fine as it is (I keep it on high because my age has provided me with cataracts that reduce light transmission), I'm going to see about doing a LED upgrade next summer similar to Petherman's, but using a slightly different approach because of having no "machine-shop" tools available to me.

Cars seem to swing wider when passing now that I have the Serfac taillight on the rear rack, and a Cygolite Hotshot velcro'd to my helmet. They look lethal when flashing madly.

also the one in their pic has a ball joint mount. mine doesn't have one. the ball joint would allow you to level the light horizontally which i'm unable to do. on the other hand the ball joint would probably make the light even less suitable for off roading than it already is - the light is just too heavy to be held like that.

I don't think the new mount is an improvement at all, I guess the old version is better and more sturdy. However the new version has 35/80 lux modes, which IMO is a more usable gradation than the 20/80 lux in the previous version.

I don't think the new mount is an improvement at all, I guess the old version is better and more sturdy. However the new version has 35/80 lux modes, which IMO is a more usable gradation than the 20/80 lux in the previous version.

both mounts are bad. the new one is less secure. the old one makes the beam project crooked. but the Ixon IQ Speed costs 4 times as much ...

Just a sidenote. I don't really share your enthusiasm and your eulogies for the Ixon IQ Speed when compared to the Philips Saferide. I've owned and used the IQ Speed some months, mainly on the roadbike. It was usable and OK, but not more, and somewhat on the bottom side of the "usability" on road bikes. Maybe there is some improvement if you use 2 Ixon IQ Speed side by side, but I guess even this way they are not very competitive in terms of price/value ratio.

See these comparative pics, shot in the same location with same settings. Markers are at 5, 10, 30 meters
Ixon IQ, Ixon IQ Speed, Philips Saferide 80

Just a sidenote. I don't really share your enthusiasm and your eulogies for the Ixon IQ Speed when compared to the Philips Saferide. I've owned and used the IQ Speed some months, mainly on the roadbike. It was usable and OK, but not more, and somewhat on the bottom side of the "usability" on road bikes. Maybe there is some improvement if you use 2 Ixon IQ Speed side by side, but I guess even this way they are not very competitive in terms of price/value ratio.

See these comparative pics, shot in the same location with same settings. Markers are at 5, 10, 30 meters
Ixon IQ, Ixon IQ Speed, Philips Saferide 80

that is fascinating ! you have quite a collection !

a few points.

1 - if i was using IQ Speed it would certainly be with 2 light heads. to me that's the entire point of that system - the symmetry.

2 - in your beam shots both Ixons are aimed lower than the SafeRide.

never the less the beam shots are certainly very useful. the two main differences i can see between Ixon and SafeRide are:

1 - the Saferide has much more spill directly in front of the front wheel

2 - the Saferide projects a more pyramid shaped light patch whereas the Ixon projects a more rectangular one.

would you agree ?

what specifically don't you like about the Ixon ? this is very interesting ! i have been looking for direct comparison between the two lights on the net but couldn't find one !

Well. I still use the Ixon IQ when I'm on road as "civilian". For a road bike the IQ Speed IMO just has not enough power/output in general and enough flood in particular. And a distinct drawback is that the near field just in front of the wheel has almost no light in the first 2 meters, in both IQ and IQ speed.
And I remind you that the IQ/IQ speed is an improved version introduced somewhere in 2009 with a better, but still deficient near field illumination, the previous model had almost no light in the first 5 meters:
See this post with the beamshot comparison: IXON IQ Speed von Busch-Müller - Seite 15 - MTB-News.de - IBC
As for the pics in the post above, the "spot" of all beamshots is aimed at more or less on the 10 meters marker, so I think it is a kind of representative comparison.